ARMA 2 (OA) : DLC discussion thread

[Nithrakis 10]

that's a good point. just look at Infinity Ward. sell 5 maps for the ridiculous price of 15 dollars even though 2 years before, we got the same for free. and it works, so they're doing it again.

there are plenty of other examples (Bioware, LucasArts, DICE, EA, Rebellion). even traditional PC developers like Bioware have succumbed to the DLC craze. who says BIS won't? who says their publishers won't push it on them?

Bioware was a DLC pioneer and was perhaps one of the first companies to invest in it heavily. There were several premium modules available as DLC for NWN1, which came out in 2002. Ironically, they did it the right way back then but now they're releasing crap like everyone else.

[-=seany=- 5]

Them stating explicitely that they're going along the paid DLC route BECAUSE they can't continue delivering for free must be them lying, mmh?

I would be interested to read that, because I cant seem to find where the first official statement about DLC was disclosed. Any links?

[spork 10]

How would DLC work with online multiplayer? i'm assuming if you want to join a particular server that's running with DLC on it, the user will have to have the same DLC?

[dm 9]

I see no problem with BIS rewarding those MOD teams that make good content.

But what about the mod teams who make the same content and dont get rewarded? It is entirely feasable that two different mod teams could create exactly the same content as each other, but one will get paid and the other not. If you cant see how that would create animosity within the community, then I'm afraid you need help.

Actually this happens any way as under the current DLC proposal; it is just that BIS automatically choose the BIS version of the modification sometimes taking on a mod members to work for them and sometimes just doing their own version without any link to the work of others and leaving them feeling cheated.

Yes, and when they choose the BIS version there is no chance of any mod maker feeling rejected or left out.

Imagine if you will (or if you can) that BIS wanted to pay a mod team for an artillery addon. On the one hand we have you and Unified Artillery (you know, that artillery addon you made for OFP), on the other hand we have joe schmoe who made an artillery addon in 2 days with none of the care and attention you guys put into UA. Now imagine that BIS chooses joe schmoe, because he is one guy, but you at CoC were like 20, so they'd have to pay him less. They pay the one guy for his half-assed artillery, and you guys get left flapping in the wind with nothing. Would you not be mad? Now imagine that BIS use some in-house system that they made themselves. Sure, you might still be a little mad because your system is way better. But because some other schmuck isnt getting paid for his crappy version, there is no animosity towards any other member of the community.

Your reasoning is flawed for the very reason you want to promote: diversity. You can not have diversity at the same time as picking and choosing who to pay from the mod community.

DM You do realise the DLC proposal as it exists alters the balance of MOD making don't you?

No, it really doesnt. At the moment the DLC proposal is NO different to how BI has worked since day one of OFP. They release content, people buy it - OFP, Resistance, ArmA, ArmA2 - and then the addon makers make their own versions of everything thats already in the game. Adding some extra content into the mix that isnt part of a major release makes no difference to that system.

Your system, where mod makers are picked "at random" to have their content included in pay systems really does change the balance. It changes the balance for the same single reason I've been going on about in all my posts: that even if 5 guys make the same thing, with your system only ONE of them will ever reap the rewards of it. The other four essentially get told to fuck off, because BIS endorses guy 1's content as good enough to pay for, but guy 2 through 5's content as not good enough to pay for. If you cant understand that, then you are very blinkered to the realities of pay-for-content in the way you're suggesting.

The DLC proposal as it exists creates the situation you fear for both MOD team A and MOD team B. So nobody wins in that case. In my alternate proposal I fully accept that there will be wining teams and none winning teams in making MODs; that is no different than what exist now and in fact my proposal redresses the balance.

No it doesnt. In my situation nobody endsup being the reject - most likely forcing them out of moding all together.

In you situation one team gets money and kudos, the other team gets nothing but rejection. And that is NOT a good way to encourage more moders in the community.

And I hate to point out but just because it was made by BIS does not make it good. Allowing BIS to correct its deficiencies by incorporating good content is only to BIS and the communities combined best interest.

I never said that was the case - infact I pointed it out:

Now, when BIS makes this content themselves, the quality will be good, but it may not be technically 100% accurate.

Sure it would be great if everything BIS made was perfect. But using the work of mod teams is not the way to go.

Providing encouragement to the MOD teams with both official recognition and some cash reward is I think a good thing that will act as a positive motivator to quality rather than quantity.

Yes, I agree that providing motivation is good. But what about all the people whos work gets rejected?

Say you make a model of an MH-47, and I make an MH-47 (hypothetically speaking, we're assuming that you and I possess the same artistic skill/tallent). Your model is just as good as mine, has all the same functionality as mine, has all the same features as mine. But mine gets picked and I get paid. You get left with nothing. NOTHING. Then you make an MH-60, and I make an MH-60. Again, the models are just as good as each other, both have the same awesome features and functionality. But again, mine gets picked and yours doesnt. Again I get all the kudos, and all the money. You, again, get nothing. Surely you're getting a bit upset by this point? Final straw, 3rd time, MH-6. Yours, mine, same. I get picked, you get nothing. How can you fail to see that this would be a fatal direction to take for the diversity of the modding community?

All your system would achieve would be a paid elite of addon makers who get their work included in official DLC, whilst everyone else gets kicked to the curb with nothing.

If everyone made 100% unique content all the time it would be great. Because people tend to make the same cool stuff over and over, its going to suck. If you still cant see that, you're beyond help. :(

[vojtzech 2]

Ok, so after the FAQ I have decided to cancel the pre-order of OA and wait for more info about DLCs. Then I decide if to buy OA (+ upcoming DLCs) or invest in something else... Because I really doubt that those DLCs are going to be distributed in retail version and I distrust online distribution and payments.

[JojoTheSlayer 35]

Taking your personal worries into consideration. What would be a good DLC product. Being specific, not just in general and taken mods into account.

What would a DLC pack you would buy contain and what would it cost?

Edited June 13, 2010 by JojoTheSlayer

[Smurf 12]

/\

||

||

Full Armies (or "forces"), $5-10. Weapons pack, no way, we already have too much with little diference. Vehicles\Campaigns\Maps, who knows?

Everyone here claiming for german, british, french etc. but nobody loves OPFOR? Whats the point to have so cool units to fight a bunch of insurgents\rebels with low tech? They should be the fist (second, brits are on their way) to receive love.

PS: BIS bought Fromz units (PLA) last year? .....hm........

[enad 11]

I would pay for large scale unit "Forces" or "Factions" DLC's.

I would definitely pay for a DLC if it included a new map or two. Maps probably extended the playing time of the game the most.

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

I would pay $5-$10 for faction DLCs, that include the entire army, such as air units, infantry, and vehicles. I would pay $15-$20 for factions + a new island.

[ebanks129 10]

Enad and Darkhorse.. Yes exactly what i would wish BI do for the future.

[archaon98 10]

I am pretty sure things like the British and Black element are going to be in the game on release.

[Franklin 0]

I would pay a couple bucks for an entire new island. New "factions" I could care less for, we already have very other addon maker retexturing the default units with every camo pattern known to man and calling it whatever nations army... so I don't see the need unless BIS is going to take the time to actually create the correct body armor (if necessary) and kit that is appropriate for that nation. Besides none of that will change gameplay in any way, shape, or form. Just because sancho wants to play with a guy with a Spanish flag on his arm, vs Hans who wants to play with a german flag... it makes no difference other than in the watered down story line of whatever buggy user made mission is being played.

Vehicle packs, could be feasible, but for a lower price... those can still be made by the community members with just as much quality as BIS can make them with. so i dont think i would pay for that bs.

I feel the biggest problem is a lack of terrains for the game that cause it to become too repetitive, and too few quality islands are released for the game and only by a very select few individuals. the change of terrain makes a huge difference in what is going on in game so that is something i would actually be willing to shell out some cash for, since it adds to the replayability of the game.

[JojoTheSlayer 35]

Vehicle packs, could be feasible, but for a lower price... those can still be made by the community members with just as much quality as BIS can make them with. so i dont think i would pay for that bs.

Yeah, I agree. For me at least, I would much rather buy some kind of DLC that did something the moders didnt do, or better yet couldnt do. BIS German force or mod German force dosent really matter that much to me when everything ingame is kinda similar. Every driver seat has a letter opening as a window etc.

I would think some kind of realism DLC for 10 EUR would be good.

You play on a COOP server, but when you, "client side", jump into a helicopter you have a increased level of realism involved for flying because of your Helicopter realism DLC. Maybe even ad a option to change skin before first take off... (If okayed by the server of course.)

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

That would only work if the server was already running the "increased realism for helicopters" dlc.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

Not entirely against it ,in fact I want to be all for it ,but just a bit wary. When I saw in the faq that they were not going to release any more MLODs I naturaly put 2 and 2 together and thought that they were of sqeezing out the modding side of things. But then again it hasn't stopped anyone so far.

The sort of DLC I definatley would pay for is theme based packs with an additional feature.

ie. a battle of britain pack with a new class of slow fixed wing with turrets.

or a CQB pack with a small dense urban map of modern western feel, and pistol proxies

or maybe even improved modding tools.

I don't even see the need to make the packs especialy big, just a few core units, with the added feature to inspire the community to fill the gaps.

What I'm unlikey to pay for is ... a hand full of units.

Edited June 13, 2010 by Pathetic_Berserker

[JojoTheSlayer 35]

That would only work if the server was already running the "increased realism for helicopters" dlc.

Not if Vanilla was updated, but only DLC owners had access to use DLC "hardware" or similar.

[hamm 10]

Not if Vanilla was updated, but only DLC owners had access to use DLC "hardware" or similar.

That would be horrible. "You want to get in this jeep with your team to escape? Sorry, you need to buy the DLC. Maybe after the next mission."

[Lightninguk 0]

I have absolutely no problem with paying for quality DLC.

[flashbang151 0]

New hardcoded features + some high quality content. I would buy that.

[chortles 263]

Islands sure, added functionality/hardcoded features maybe... and certain vehicles; if BIS is going to get into the BIS-made-missions/campaigns dealie "Queen's Gambit" style I'd be interested, and in fact those are the sort of DLC that I'd be most likely to purchase, professionally-made scenarios.

Weapons and units though, absolutely not -- I know it may make me sound like a freeloader*, but frankly... the "so much stuff I didn't have to pay for" is why I like ARMA in the first place. :P I wouldn't want anything that'd reduce the modifiability of the game, or the ability for people to create their own free content and post it for free download and use (without requiring BIS-made DLC!).

I do like the acknowledgment that quality control is more important than adding new features., but I have to admit to some disappointment at seeing how the under-the-hood changes in OA weren't very advanced (i.e. still using a HP system for vehicles), or more drastic changes being brushed off as not worth the effort... If OA is a genuine expansion, otherwise I might stick to running regular ARMA II and mods.

* I won't lie, I am a freeloader, but I can be susceptible to optional DLC that's priced on a nickel-and-dime basis.

Edited June 13, 2010 by Chortles

[archaon98 10]

I would imagine DLC being things like, A new map, with a mini campaign like EW, or maybe just a new scenario in general correlating with Harvest Red or Operation Arrowhead, or a standalone mini campaign. My main wish for ArmA 2, was more professionally made missions, given to us by BIS. I would love to see a mini campaign involving the KSK, or czech.

[kremator 1065]

The only thing I would play for in DLC is for something that RADICALLY changes the game engine ... something LIKE proper thermal vision (that is coming with OA).

Everything else can be made by the community.

One thing I would pay for NOW is after-battle review !

[JojoTheSlayer 35]

That would be horrible. "You want to get in this jeep with your team to escape? Sorry, you need to buy the DLC. Maybe after the next mission."

You could still make is so people could ride in the none functional back seats.

Like, what would be the point in having a DLC troop transport if you couldnt transport anyone? "Wanna drive the jeep to escape, get the DLC, otherwise get in the back" sort of thing, but in any case, unless DLC is just going to be single player stuff. There will be some limitations on other players or else whats really the point of paying for something everybody else has full access to for free?

Not that a jeep or tank re skin DLC would be anything special, its just a example.

Edited June 13, 2010 by JojoTheSlayer

[gossamersolid 155]

I'm sorry, but these paid DLCs are just going to cause more issues for MP. Some people will have x pack, some won't have any. There's a lot of people who will refuse to buy the DLC. To be honest, I'd rather pay $50 instead of $35 for OA if it means I would be getting free dlc along the road.

Also what happens if BIS releases "British weapons pack" and then some modder comes along and says, screw that I'll make a close version of that DLC... does he get banned from the forums/community for not wanting to pay for that DLC?

[hamm 10]

Also what happens if BIS releases "British weapons pack" and then some modder comes along and says, screw that I'll make a close version of that DLC... does he get banned from the forums/community for not wanting to pay for that DLC?

If he uses BIS' DLC and repacks it into his own mod and distributes it, most likely yes.